Linux

48008 readers

925 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
No misinformation
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

231

Redox OS - an OS built entirely out of Rust (www.redox-os.org)

submitted 10 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

94 comments fedilink hide all child comments

This isn't Linux, but Linux-like. Its a microkernel built from the rust programming language. Its still experimental, but I think it has great potential. It has a GUI desktop, but the compiler isn't quite fully working yet.

Has anyone used this before? What was your experience with it?

Note: If this is inappropriate since this isn't technically Linux, mods please take down.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 34 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Yes, as much as I appreciate memory safety and rust in particular. I'm very worried by this pivot away from copyleft and GPL. Specially the rewriting in rust phenomenon of fundamental stuff. It's safer, yes, but they're all pretty much non GPL and it seems very risky to me. Make no mistake, the industry is riding this wave to move away from copyleft to permissive licenses.

I wish that people understood the importance of FSF and GNU

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Well that is rather insidious. Crap. They probably understand the reasons for the GPL very well. Doesn't mean they support them.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago

I'm sure there's some community pull as well, because most of the rust ecosystem seems to be converged on MIT. But what despairs me is the wilful sidelining of GPL and everything GNU by some open source community members/corporate people. So yeah, you're probably right

[+] [email protected] -11 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

You make it sound like a conspiracy. Just accept that some things are organically more popular, like MIT which is very easy to understand and use for normies. It's not perfect, but that's how it is

[–] [email protected] 17 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

MIT is a terrible license that only got popular because of the popularity of the anti-open source movement in the last decade.

one could write books about what's wrong with the MIT license.

It could even theoretically be argued that MIT has in some ways allowed big tech companies to proliferate, by effectively allowing them to take open-source code, modify it, and then close it off in their proprietary software. What does this mean? It means that the work of countless dedicated open-source developers can be co-opted by companies that have done almost none of the work, reaping several billions of dollars, while the developers who actually did the work make no money. It's like opening your doors wide only to have someone come in, take your stuff, and sell it back to you.

In contrast, in licenses like the GPL, there's a requirement that if you use GPL-licensed code and modify it, your new code also has to be open-source under the GPL.

[+] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

[deleted]

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I'd like to correct you by saying that GPL is DEFINITELY enforceable in countries other than america. I can't say about every country (tho that will be the case with every license), but for instance it's definitely enforceable in europe. For example in Germany and France there have been a few lawsuits that the FSF helped carry out against immoral companies.

GPL Enforcement Cases - FSFE

If you're in Germany the Institute for Legal Questions on Free and Open Source Software is a law firm that literally works only on enforcing the GPL, FOSS licenses and other technological human rights that are being ignored by big tech.

If you want to be even more sure about European Enforcement you may want to checkout the EUPL v1.2 which is GPLv3 compatible.

In other countries, such as Japan, the GPL is also enforceable, so long as you treat it the same way as copyright, so you're willing to sue companies that you know are stealing from you (the FSF can help you if you can't afford it).

Russia and China don't care, but... it's Russia and China, that's not really news, is it? :)

EDIT: I will write a full article about the legal enforce-ability of FOSS licenses such as the GPL before the end of the year